It escapes me how we evangelicals continue to prove every election time that we do, indeed, trust chariots over Jesus. It inevitably raises eyebrows when I suggest that God is pro-choice. Of course, I don't really mean that he endorses abortion, but consider this: Choice, or free-will is central to His unconditional love for us. Without it, his love would be contingent on our strict obedience, and Jesus would have died in vain. Even God, by his very nature, cannot and will not legislate morality, but we can change hearts by loving and caring for those who have made wrong choices with their lives--just as God has with us. If we spent as much time teaching our children the value of making right choices as we do spewing condemnation upon those who do not understand the virtues of those values (ie: self discipline, self respect and confidence, personal responsibility, positive self esteem, selflessness, dignity, etc.), I am convinced problems like abortion, drug abuse, divorce, crime-in-general, and in many cases, even poverty, would be radically diminished to an infinitely greater degree than all combined legislative efforts could ever hope to accomplish.
What sickens me is the new poll that claims 94% of evangelical voters list abortion as their primary election concern. Hmm...let's see, approximately 64,000 people starve to death every day around the world; millions of children must prostitute themselves multiple times daily in order to break even on survival--as though abject poverty and homelessness and the loss of one's virginity at the age of 6 should even be considered survival; millions more children work in horrific conditions in sweat shops so that we Americans can live in the illusion of relative wealth by taking advantage of purchasing goods manufactured in those sweatshops. I can go on and on with the real issues that should be first and forefront on the minds of everyone--especially those who call themselves followers of Christ. Yet, in the average church, these things seldom get anything more than occasional lip service on Sunday mornings.
I'm not saying we shouldn't vote responsibly, but if voting is to matter, the first thing that must be done is to demand candidates who bring solid solutions for the real problems facing humanity to the table in their campaigns, and then hold them accountable to them once we elect them. However, as long as we continue to think we can elect politicians to do our bidding for us, we will continue to consider ourselves good evangelicals and Americans, and we will continue to ignore the house cleaning that needs to take place in the House of God, both in our hearts and our institutions.
10 comments:
Spot on Webb!
Why draw a line placing care for the starving and oppressed in opposition to care for the unborn? Is significance determined only by the number of people who suffer or are denied human and humane existence? It seems to me it can argued that both are justice issues. Both are life and death issues. Both are REAL issues. Both break the heart of God. Why diminish one to trumpet the other? Isn't that what the traditional church of doing, only with the issues flip-flopped? It seems we should be more interested in helping the pro-life crowd operate in a spirit of humility and compassion(especially toward the women struggling with this unspeakably difficult decision) than in throwing stones at them.
Alan, caring for the starving is hardly in opposition to caring for the unborn. But, for one thing, legislating the morality of abortion, especially a generation removed from the onset of Roe v. Wade, is not an effective or Christ-centered way to address the situation. In fact, politics is hardly the way to address either of these issues, which is precisely the point I made. I've seen Dobson, et al take out a lot of good candidates from the running based solely on the abortion issue. Some of those candidates were pro-life, but were also smart enough to know that legislation was not the answer. The reality of it is that abortion is an easy, affordable issue to tackle so that churches can feel like they're doing good while continuing to build unjustifiable extravagant worship complexes. Solving starvation doesn't afford that luxury.
Webb - I think I'm a bit more with you now. Yes, the expenditure of energy and resources to rally behind such things as a constitutional amendment to ban abortion is silly and does harm to other issues, and to realistic pro-life solutions as well. I guess what through me was the language of your original post which seemed to imply that abortion was not a “real issue” like poverty. My point is that both are real.
One other comment of note. You also said that we should demand elected officials who will bring solid solutions and then hold those officials accountable. Then in the next sentence you suggest that evangelicals are guilty of electing politicians who will do their bidding. Seems like the same tactic with a different characterization to me.
My intent is not to defend the indefensible - namely the over-zealousness of some which actually damages God's kingdom purposes in our world and takes us away from diving in more broadly and effectively than we do on all real issues. Amen to all of that. A good house cleaning is absolutely in order and way over due. I join my prayer to yours to that end.
Now in doing so, let's not make the mistake of the generation before mine and retreat from the public square or refuse to speak up on moral issues, especially on one as profound as abortion because of the political discomfort is arouses. But let's find a way of speaking to this issues as Jesus might have - with love and compassion and grace rather than with a self-righteous kind of piety that ignores all other issues of weight.
Alan, Regarding your 2nd paragraph, you're right. I didn't mean it that way--poor proofing on my part. What I meant is that IF voting is going to matter, we should demand candidates who will remain dedicated to their promises to fight for things that matter. I never thought I would say this, but I really have come to the conclusion at this juncture that it really will matter little who wins. I think the only real choice is to not vote at all. I think it would make a better statement than simply choosing the lesser of two evils. I'm not even sure who the lesser would be.
I think Jim Dobson (someone whom I admired at one time), while well-intentioned, has led evangelicals astray into an unhealthy reliance on the political process (actually I agree with him about McCain, although for different reasons). Don't get me wrong, politics does matter. But, change will only come when people begin to think and act on their own--the Western Church fails miserably at that. Grassroots social action by God's people can fix a lot of society's ills much better and much more efficiently than government bureaucracy--unless, of course, our religious institutions mirror the bureaucracy of it governmental counterpart, which is so often the case.
Webb - Agreed. And my disgust with the Democrat/Republican political establishment almost makes me able to understand the nihilist point of view. In as much as the church has joined itself to one side or the other (I am just as disappointed in the liberal church's capitulation to left-wing politics as the evangelical church's attempt to wed itself to right-wing politics) it has severely weakened its prophetic voice. But we must add our voice to the conversation. Still, our battle is for the hearts and minds of those for who Christ gave his life and then rose again. I think what drew me into the conversation initially was what I perceived as an apparent willingness to conceded on the abortion issue in order to fight against poverty, oppression and other such issues. My point was that I think that the church can do both. But whether we are working for justice for the poor,oppressed and marginalized or for the unborn, we have to do it passionately, relentlessly, wisely and with an abundance of compassion and love so as not to unnecessarily (you can't help but offend some) alienate those who do not particularly share our passion or point of view. I'm not sure that the church has figured out how to do that yet. But I'm encourgaed by the kinds of conversations I see here at "Stumbling." Grace and peace to you.
Hello. This post is likeable, and your blog is very interesting, congratulations :-). I will add in my blogroll =). If possible gives a last there on my blog, it is about the Projetores, I hope you enjoy. The address is http://projetor-brasil.blogspot.com. A hug.
Alan, You know, it is the conversations I get into such as this one with you that I find so endearing about blogging. I do wish I had more time to do it. But, I think it has helped many of us to be able to dust ourselves off when we stumble and to move to more stable footage in our quest to know God and His will for us.
Your voice and wisdom is welcome here anytime, my brother. :)
projetor, Gracias, Senor. I will have to send the link to my son because I just used up about all of my Spanish knowledge. :-) He is quite proficient at it and getting better now that he has a steady girlfriend from Guatemala. :)
I stumbled into this article by accident. I am neither evangelical nor Christian. I am a justice-motivated pro-lifer who has struggled with this very dichotomy my whole adult life. I always tend to vote in a liberal way because of the immense quantity of human rights issues they support, but this issue has always grated on my conscience, especially after voting. This article provided just the reassurance I needed to get me through the day today. Thanks - blessings be upon you.
Post a Comment